The St. Cloud school board July 24 cast a nonbinding vote to move forward with the district's current two-high school structure rather than creating a larger, unified high school that would serve the entire city.

With this decision, the question that must now be addressed is what form will a new Technical High School take? Can the existing Tech campus be reformed to accommodate a school for the next 100 years? Or is it better to relocate the school to new land in the south part of the district?

First, I often read it is impossible to save the current building. However, I have not seen a solid cost study showing what it would take to adapt or renovate the site and building to make it workable. Buildings are renovated each day in this country, and a well-constructed building can last for centuries.

Moreover, the age of a building does not need to hamper the work that that goes on inside of it.

Harvard and Oxford have very old structures yet are the among world's finest educational institutions.

The hospital in St. Cloud is of the same era as Tech, and world-class medicine is practiced there.

Lawrence Hall and the Riverview building at St. Cloud State University were recently renovated from thoroughly dilapidated conditions and are now open for business.

Clearly, old buildings can be brought back to life and are of great historical and practical value. Is it possible to repurpose what we already have?

Second, I understand land use requirements are a concern. Under state law, if the campus is to be maintained, the district will be required to acquire additional land around the building, which will entail the demolition of multiple structures.

Has anyone approached the Legislature to see if it is possible to restructure land use rules? It seems a single rule is being applied to rural, suburban and urban schools alike. Does this really make sense?

Third, if Tech is moved toward the edge of town, it could impose a hardship on students who live in the city core and who can least afford transportation for extracurricular activities. It seems moving the school is forcing urban sprawl, and moving in a very different direction from most contemporary urban planning theories.

Now is the time to invest in a serious cost-benefit analysis. An architectural and engineering firm should be engaged to determine the viability of the current building. Such a study should include the true costs of moving (including increased infrastructure costs) and the impact that it is likely to have on the city center. Even a study costing $1 million would be only a fraction of the cost of a new building, so it seems prudent to invest in getting the information needed to make a rational decision.

If a cost-benefit analysis does determine moving is the only viable solution — and this may well be the case once the costs are fully understood — then what other measures could be taken to ensure the community's resources are being used well and that a hole is not left in the central city?

It seems many resources that could be used by Tech and Apollo could be shared and located at the current campus.

For example, Clark Field could serve as the home field for the Tigers and the Eagles. Football is always the first sport people think of at Clark Field, but it could be designed to accommodate soccer, lacrosse and other field sports. Ample parking could be included with a parking deck, and the stadium could host public events as well.

A state-of-the-art performing arts center for high school students could be created on the Tech campus. When shared among all district schools, the per-pupil costs of such facilities drops fast.

The decisions made in the coming weeks and months will shape education and urban development in St. Cloud for the next century. Now is the time to consider the options carefully with solid data driving the decision-making process.